The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) predicted that the population of Bangladesh would reach between 230-250 million in 2050. Presently, the country is adding 2 million people annually to the national population and for that, it is losing 1 percent of agricultural land every year.
There are roughly 8.77 million hectares of cultivable land available, out of which, 88 percent is cultivated. So, there is a limited scope to expand the cultivated area.
The Asian Development Bank in one of its studies revealed that Bangladesh’s economy is more at risk from climate change than any other.
Without changes to current global behaviour, the country could lose around 2 percent of its GDP by 2050. Since two-thirds of the country is less than 15 feet above sea level, a three-foot rise in sea level would submerge almost 20 percent of the entire country, reducing cultivatable land and potentially displacing 35 million people by 2050.
The report also predicted that climate change could have devastating impacts on water resources and agriculture; rice production could decline by 8 percent and wheat by 32 percent, creating a very high risk of hunger.
To feed 250 million people by 2050 at the current level of food production efficiency, we’d have to clear most of the forests.
Bangladesh needs efficient and sustainable agriculture. There is no choice, yield in agriculture must be maximized.
Bangladesh is pretty crowded. The land is quite expensive and it is having a shortage of labour in the agriculture sector, so it has to be more efficient and needs drives of innovation and technology.
By 2050, it will need to feed 250 million people on the land, which will be more challenging due to the impact climate change is having on our soil.
If the world’s current level of production efficiency continues, feeding the planet in 2050 would require clearing most of the country’s remaining forests, wiping out thousands more kinds, and releasing enough greenhouse gas emissions to exceed the 1.5°C and 2°C warming targets enshrined in the Paris Agreement – even if emissions from all other human activities were entirely eliminated.
Therefore, it is crucial that innovative agriculture techniques are used in the country to scale up production. We just need to commit resources in the short term for future gain. Sometimes sustainable solutions cost a bit more in the short term, but in the long term they should be more effective and that’s actually what we need. Bangladesh needs to have the guts to invest in those kinds of things that will benefit in the long term.
We know that growth in agriculture is two to three times more effective at reducing poverty than growth in other sectors. More needs to be done to support farmers through regulatory reforms so that they can grow their businesses and thrive. Although it is up to governments to decide which regulatory changes and effective executions are the most feasible. Countries that have efficient regulatory processes in agriculture tend to have higher productivity. Increasing agricultural productivity in a sustainable manner is a priority in the race to fix food systems so that farmers can produce higher quality food, feed growing populations and improve their livelihoods while reducing the impact of agriculture on climate and natural resources.
The drivers of agricultural transformation are multidimensional, interrelated, and change over time, but they can be organised into categories to provide a better opportunity for pragmatic diagnostics and decision making on national priorities.
Developing an agricultural transformation plan demands prioritization—a plan will not succeed if it tries to cover everything. Instead, it should focus on the changes that are most likely to kick-start rural economic growth.
A second related success factor is differentiation. Successful agricultural transformation plans differentially target agri-food systems and geographic areas with tailored strategies.
A third related success factor lies in weighing the trade-offs among multiple objectives. Governments work toward a number of different goals, including growth in agro-processing, reduced unemployment, lower poverty incidence, food self-sufficiency, economic growth, increased exports, and lower rates of malnutrition.
Fourth, agricultural transformations often focus too much on volume rather than value and on the productivity of row crops rather than opportunities for high-value crops, downstream processing, and livestock.
Farmers everywhere are businesspeople. Farming households in developing countries balance a portfolio of crops, livestock, and nonfarm work. Because they feed their families with some of the farm output as well as sell into markets, they make decisions based on their potential profit, risk, and cash flow across family food consumption as well as sales.
Too often, agricultural plans recommend particular commodities without paying attention to this basic calculus of farmer household economics. Successful agricultural transformation plans give farmers the opportunity to raise their household incomes.
The success of any agricultural transformation relies on how well millions of smallholders and small- and medium-sized enterprises can be helped to change farming practices as quickly and effectively as possible. For example, increased productivity in the dairy sector might be achieved through farmers accessing better animal health technologies and better cattle breeds or joining dairy cooperatives to sell their milk. Change agents provide the critical interface with farmers. To catalyse this, a change agent might be the person providing extension knowledge, offering to finance for farming inputs such as fertilizer, aggregating crops, or facilitating marketing services.
Multiple parallel advancements are required. Such as, improvements in agricultural extension and seed systems might enable farmers to switch to a more productive hybrid seed, but lack of access to fertilizer (upon which the hybrid depends) could prevent productivity increases and leave the farmer unwilling to buy hybrid seed next time. Overly prescriptive and inflexible strategies in agricultural transformation fail because of the complexity of agriculture-based economies.
A different, less top-down approach might be to enable change agents to set local targets and work with farmers who know the economics of maize production all too well. As changes begin to occur, the most critical success factor is that the plan allows for learning and that it is flexible enough to be adjusted as understanding progresses.
Approaching transformations with an investor mindset is critical to the success of the process. In kick-starting agricultural transformations, coordination among government, donors, and civil society are critical, but it is equally important from the start to plan for private-sector engagement. In the absence of these, the transformation may proceed more slowly, stall, or not reach scale. Agricultural transformation plans with an investor mindset anticipate changes in the enabling environment that will be necessary as the transformation progresses to support increasing private-sector engagement. These policies, laws, and regulations are usually across multiple sectors in addition to agriculture, including banking, trade, and land policies.
Agricultural transformation is more than changes in farming practices. It is about catalysing the transformation of a country’s rural economy.
Such as laws and regulations that influence banking, labour, infrastructure, land ownership and access, access to water, telecommunications, taxes, and insurance are also critical considerations.
Land policy is often cited as a pivotal factor in determining whether a country’s agricultural transformation can simultaneously achieve sustained progress and inclusivity (contributing to widespread poverty reduction).
Above all, effective policymaking for agricultural transformation needs to become more evidence-based over time. Policymakers should invest in making use of existing data and analytics to comparatively assess the costs and likely outcomes of different potential transformation programs.
Policymakers also need to use data and analytics to set reasonable targets and redirect programs where outcomes are not meeting targets.
Evidence-based policymaking builds better plans and integrates accountability into the systems responsible for implementing the policies. An agricultural transformation is not just a planning exercise. It takes management over time.
Our experience suggests that creating a project management office can greatly increase the chances of carrying out a successful large-scale change program. Agricultural transformation is essential to the future well-being of the nation. For a transformation to succeed, there must be a common understanding of the plan, stakeholder roles, and approach to the management of the process.
